University of Iowa
Iowa City, Iowa, 52242, United States
NCT Number: NCT04562896
The proposed study evaluates the effect of carbon fiber brace design on forces across the ankle joint. Research suggests that ankle arthritis develops after ankle fracture, in part, due to elevated forces on the cartilage. It is expected that carbon fiber braces can be designed to reduce forces in the ankle joint and thereby reduce the risk of developing arthritis following traumatic injury. In this study, brace geometry will be varied to determine how these changes influence the forces experienced by ankle cartilage. The proposed study will provide evidence that can be used by clinicians and researchers to design braces that most effectively reduce forces on ankle cartilage.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year–65 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Iowa City, Iowa, 52242, United States
The primary purpose of this line of research is to investigate the effects of carbon fiber custom dynamic orthosis (CDO) design on the forces and contact stress at the ankle, with the goal of reducing the development of post traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) in the ankle. Research suggests that ankle arthritis develops, in part, due to increased contact stresses within the ankle joint following fracture. It is expected that reducing articular contact stress at the ankle has the potential to delay or prevent the development of PTOA. CDOs have been shown to significantly improve function following extremity injury, and show promise for offloading the injured limb after severe lower extremity injuries. Therefore, the proposed effort is designed to evaluate how different CDO design factors influence offloading and therefore the reduction of forces and articular contact stress at the ankle.
Adult participants will be evaluated while wearing carbon fiber braces of varied geometry. The primary dependent measure is ankle joint contact stress. Following consent and enrollment computerized tomography (CT) images will be used to determine the geometry of the joint articular surfaces. Ankle contact stress will be calculated using discrete element analysis and biomechanical data collected in subsequent data collection.
Participants will be cast and fit for three CDOs with varied geometry. Participants will be blinded to the design variation of each device and will only know them as CDO-A, CDO-B, or CDO-C. Testing will be completed under 4 conditions: No-CDO, CDO-A, CDO-B, CDO-C, with each bracing condition (A/B/C) representing a CDO design variant. Physical performance measures will incorporate tests of agility, speed, and lower limb power to ensure that changes to device design do not negatively affect physical function. Questionnaires will be used to evaluate participants' current and desired activity level, pain with and without CDO use, satisfaction with the devices, perception of comfort and smoothness between devices, and preference between CDOs. Semi-structured interviews will be completed to fully capture the participant's perspective. Lower limb forces and motion will be assessed using a computerized motion capture system and force plates in the floor. Forces between the foot and CDO will be measured using force sensing insoles, and muscle activity data will be collected using surface electromyography. Devices will be mechanically tested, and participant demographic and anthropometric data will be recorded.
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
TIBIAL PILON FRACTURE PARTICIPANTS:
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
HEALTHY ABLE-BODIED PARTICIPANTS:
Patient Inclusion Criteria
Patient Exclusion Criteria
The custom carbon fiber dynamic orthoses will consist of a semi-rigid foot plate, a posterior carbon fiber strut, and a proximal cuff below the knee.
Other names: Ankle Foot Orthosis
Time frame: Baseline
Joint contact stress time exposure (MPA-s/gait cycle) was estimated using a participant specific musculoskeletal model. Peak joint contact stress time exposure (MPA-s/gait cycle) acting on the tibia during the gait cycle were reported. Lower peak contact stress time exposure is considered a better outcome.
Time frame: Baseline
Plantar forces normalized to body weight (N/kg) will be measured across the forefoot (100% of sensor) and normalized to participant body weight as they walk.
Time frame: Baseline
Plantar forces normalized to body weight (N/kg) will be measured across the forefoot (proximal 30% of sensor) as participants walk without a CDO and with each CDO.
Time frame: Baseline
Plantar forces normalized to body weight (N/kg) will be measured across the forefoot (middle 30% of sensor) as participants walk without a CDO and with each CDO.
Time frame: Baseline
Plantar forces normalized to body weight (N/kg) will be measured across the forefoot (distal 40% of sensor) as participants walk without a CDO and with each CDO.
Time frame: Baseline
Plantar force impulse normalized to body weight (Ns/kg) across the forefoot (100% of sensor) will be calculated using the integral of the force over the stance phase and normalized to participant body weight as they walk.
Time frame: Baseline
Plantar force impulse normalized to body weight (Ns/kg) across the forefoot (proximal 30% of sensor) will be calculated using the integral of the force over the stance phase as participants walk without a CDO and with each CDO.
Time frame: Baseline
Plantar force impulse normalized to body weight (Ns/kg) across the forefoot (middle 30% of sensor) will be calculated using the integral of the force over the stance phase as participants walk without a CDO and with each CDO.
Time frame: Baseline
Plantar force impulse normalized to body weight (Ns/kg) across the forefoot (distal 40% of sensor) will be calculated using the integral of the force over the stance phase as participants walk without a CDO and with each CDO.
Time frame: Baseline
Pain will be assessed using a standard 11-point numerical pain rating scale, in which 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable. Lower values are better as they indicate less pain.
Time frame: Baseline
Pain will be assessed using a standard 11-point numerical pain rating scale, in which 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable. Lower values are better as they indicate less pain
Time frame: Baseline
The participant will rank order their preference for their standard of care device (if applicable), No Device, CDO-A, CDO-B, CDO-C on a questionnaire.
Time frame: Baseline
Participants were asked to rank order their preference for NoCDO, CDO-A, CDO-B, CDO-C on a questionnaire.
Time frame: Baseline
Participants were asked to rank order the testing conditions from the condition they would most prefer to walk in everyday (first preferred) to the condition they would least prefer to walk in everyday (fourth preferred).
Time frame: Baseline
Participants were asked to rank order the testing conditions from the condition they would most prefer to walk in everyday (first preferred) to the condition they would least prefer to walk in everyday (fourth preferred).
Time frame: Baseline
Participants were asked to rank order the testing conditions from the condition they would most prefer to walk in everyday (first preferred) to the condition they would least prefer to walk in everyday (fourth preferred).
Time frame: Baseline
Peak soleus muscle force (N) during gait was estimated using a participant specific musculoskeletal model.
Time frame: Baseline
Peak gastrocnemius muscle force (N) during gait was estimated using a participant specific musculoskeletal model.
Time frame: Baseline
Peak ankle dorsiflexion (degrees) during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
Peak ankle plantarflexion moment (Nm/kg) during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
Peak ankle push-off power (W/kg) during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
The 4SST (s) is a standardized timed test of balance and agility. One inch pipe is placed on the floor in the shape of a Maltese cross and participants are instructed to begin in the back left quadrant then to move 1) forward, 2) sideways right, 3) backward, then 4) sideways left, then to move in the reverse direction back to the original square.
Time frame: Baseline
STS5 (s) is a well-established timed measure of lower limb muscle strength and power. Participants are instructed to start the test sitting with their arms folded across their chest and with their back against a standard chair. Patients are then instructed to stand up and sit down 5 times as fast as possible, avoiding touching their back to the chair during each repetition. The time to complete all five continuous repetitions is reported.
Time frame: Baseline
Satisfaction with device will be assessed using the Orthotics Prosthetics Users' Survey Satisfaction With Device Score (11-55). Lower scores indicate a better outcome.
Time frame: Baseline
Comfort scores range from 0 = most uncomfortable to 10 = most comfortable. Higher scores are better as they indicate a more comfortable device.
Time frame: Baseline
Comfort scores range from 0 = least smooth to 10 = most smooth. Higher scores are better as they indicate a smoother rollover with the device.
Time frame: Baseline
Semi-structured interviews will also be used to fully capture the patients' perspectives, experience, and opinions associated with the device options they experienced as part of the study.
Time frame: Baseline
Timing of peak center of pressure velocity (percent stance) during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
Magnitude of peak center of pressure velocity (m/s) during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the soleus during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of theTibialis Anterior during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Medial Gastrocnemius during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Rectus Femoris during gait.
Time frame: Baseline
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Vastus Medialis during gait.
University of Iowa
Other
Acronym: PRMRP-FPA2
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT03809520
Ankle Fractures, Ankle Injuries
Iowa City, Iowa, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT02664337
Ankle Fractures, Ankle Injuries
Durham, North Carolina, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05412693
Ankle Fractures, Ankle Injuries
Ålesund, Norway
View Trial DetailsNCT05662449
Ankle Fractures, Ankle Injuries
Aberdeen, United Kingdom
View Trial Details